4.6 Article

Seismic fragility and reliability of structures isolated by friction pendulum devices: seismic reliability-based design (SRBD)

期刊

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/eqe.2798

关键词

friction pendulum devices; Monte Carlo simulations; power spectral density method; medium soil condition; seismic fragility; seismic reliability

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The paper deals with the seismic reliability of elastic structural systems equipped with friction pendulum isolators (friction pendulum system). The behavior of these systems is analyzed by employing a two-degree-of-freedom model accounting for the superstructure flexibility, whereas the friction pendulum system device behavior is described by adopting a widespread model that considers the variation of the friction coefficient with the velocity. With reference to medium soil condition, the uncertainty in the seismic inputs is taken into account by considering a set of artificial records, obtained through Monte Carlo simulations within the power spectral density method, with different frequency contents and characteristics depending on the soil dynamic parameters and scaled to increasing intensity levels. The sliding friction coefficient at large velocity is also considered as random variable modeled through a uniform probability density function. Incremental dynamic analyses are developed in order to evaluate the probabilities exceeding different limit states related to both r.c. superstructure and isolation level defining the seismic fragility curves through an extensive parametric study carried out for different structural system properties. Finally, considering the seismic hazard curves related to a site near L'Aquila (Italy), the seismic reliability of the r.c. superstructure systems is evaluated, and seismic reliability-based design abacuses are derived with the aim to define the radius in plan of the friction pendulum devices in function of the structural properties and reliability level expected. Copyright (C) 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据